As well, try to look at what you have presented un-biasedly, just how much of a violation of the second law did you have to “tolerate” in order to have the DNA molecule in the first place so as to have the “limited reaction” to a thermodynamic equilibrium state with it? As well rna, as pointed out previously, there is a molecular machine that lays down the specific sequences in question:

Telomere Replication
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJNoTmWsE0s

Please tell me why this machine even exists if your position is correct.

So apparently rna, from the existance of the machine, there is a very desirable reason for having these particular sequences in very specific places in the DNA molecule that they are at, so as to help achieve the stunning levels of information packing we witness in the DNA molecule, which is trillions of level higher that what we have been able to accomplish with our most advanced computer chips:

rna, You stated you felt insulted that I would question if you got money for holding your unreasonable position, yet when looking at the evidence once again, I feel intellectually insulted that you hold your position in the first place, surely you can’t be this stubborn as to deny the obvious.

“You must get paid money for holding your unreasonable position.”

So now we are at ad hominems. Very nice.
It might well be that I hold unreasonable positions but if so I haven’t talked about any position I personally hold in this thread. I talked about things that have been measured and experimentally characterized over and over. e. g. that g-quadruplexes form spontaneously due to the inherent chemistry of the guanine nucleotide in solution is an observation not a position I happen to hold. That the formation of this complex structure is favored by the second law is also an experimental finding since the entropy change connected with g-quadruplex formation has been measured. and so on …

Contamination of the genome by very slightly deleterious mutations: why have we not died 100 times over? Kondrashov A.S.
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/.....4/art00167

The Frailty of the Darwinian Hypothesis
“The net effect of genetic drift in such (vertebrate) populations is “to encourage the fixation of mildly deleterious mutations and discourage the promotion of beneficial mutations,” http://www.evolutionnews.org/2......html#more

High genomic deleterious mutation rates in hominids
Excerpt: Furthermore, the level of selective constraint in hominid protein-coding sequences is atypically (unusually) low. A large number of slightly deleterious mutations may therefore have become fixed in hominid lineages.
http://www.nature.com/nature/j.....344a0.html

Sorry for the delay in replying.

Please stick to the subject. Genetic Entropy, mutation, radiation elevated rates of mutation

That isn’t the subject of this thread.

No, but somehow “cobalt bomb lab” experiments aren’t either.

By the way Nak, recombination won’t prevail if the mutation rates are sufficently high relative to the excess reproduction rate. I gave reasons to infer that we get at least 100 new mutations per individual. Nachman put the limit at about 3. We’re way beyond 3!

You gave? This is a back of the envelope calculation you did or are you citing research? Nachman’s own number for total mutations was about 175, and for deleterious mutations about 3. If you think you have evidence that the whole neutral theory of mutation is wrong, bring it on.

My point was that the reason for the occurence of multiple guanines in a row in the sequence has to do with the specific chemical properties of guanines and their resulting ability to form stabilizing quadruplexes. The sequences are not haphazard for this reason.

There is something potentially unwholesome in this line of reasoning, namely the idea: “Something is not haphazard because it would fail to be functional.”

But there is no a priori reason that it needs to be functional in the first place. Functionality is a privilege not an inevitable guarantee by nature! The fact that something is exists to make something else functional in the natural world does not mean mindless forces will necessarily assemble the functionality.

If we used such reasoning to say fuel injectors make fuel injected cars functional, therefore mindless forces made cars, it would be obvious a non-sequitur has been put forward. The same issue applies here regarding the sequencing of DNA to allow quadruplex topographies!

A Meaningful World by Benjamin Wiker & Jonathan Witt
http://www.ameaningfulworld.com/

you may taste of their style, and read chapter 1 here:

http://www.ameaningfulworld.co.....lworld.pdf

I especially liked how they took Dawkin’s famous “Methinks it is like a weasel” phrase and point out that the phrase has no meaning until the entirety of the book is taken into context. Yet when the entirety of the context is taken into account, it is very humerous to learn that the phrase in reality highlights the wishy washy thinking of a spineless character in the play who has not enough dignity within himself to stand up for the truth: Much like what we see in quite a few people here on UD:

Hamlet: Do you see that cloud, that’s almost in shape like a camel?

Polonius: By the mass, and ‘t is like a camel, indeed.

Hamlet: Methinks, it is like a weasel.

Polonius: It is backed like a weasel.

Hamlet: Or, like a whale?

Polonius: Very like a whale.

Here is a synopsis of the book:

In this groundbreaking book, Wiker and Witt show that nature offers all of the challenges and surprises, all of the mystery and elegance, we associate with design and, further, with artistic genius. They begin in Shakespeare and range through the fine-tuning of the laws of physics, the Periodic Table of Elements, the artistry of ordinary substances like carbon and water, the intricacy of biological organisms, and the drama of scientific exploration itself. In contrast to contemporary claims that the world is ultimately meaningless, Wiker and Witt reveal a cosmos charged with both meaning and purpose.

Elsewise you are artificial creating a “thermodynamically uphill” environment. As you well know this is cheating in origin of life research.

As far as your remark to sal, my first reaction was to think you are completely agreeing that it is an engineered sequence, and that you are joining the ID camp. If not, which I am fairly sure is as it is, please explain the telomere machinery that lays down the sequences from your desired chemistry first standpoint. Shoot I would even be happy if you would do that for the far less complicated machinery of ATP synthase:

Evolution Vs ATP Synthase – Molecular Machine – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/.....r_machine/

The telomeres are of course synthesized by the telomerase enzyme. My point was that the reason for the occurence of multiple guanines in a row in the sequence has to do with the specific chemical properties of guanines and their resulting ability to form stabilizing quadruplexes. The sequences are not haphazard for this reason.